"Chaos in the West": Populism or Capitalist Crisis?

At present, many people are perplexed and confused by the large-scale demonstrations, violent conflicts, war and turbulence that frequently appear in Western societies and even across the globe. They find it especially hard to understand why the long-regarded developed, prosperous, and free "millennial kingdom" of Europe and America has produced phenomena such as the "Occupy Wall Street" movement, the "Tea Party" movement, the Trump phenomenon, the "Sanders Surge," Brexit, the London riots, France's "Nuit Debout" movement, prolonged strikes, the "Yellow Vests" movement, and so on. Yet, faced with such severe "chaos in the West," the reflections and attributions of mainstream Western public opinion are even more astonishing and bewildering. Western political, business, and academic circles commonly use "the proliferation of populism" to explain the large number of such social phenomena that began appearing after the 2008 financial crisis, and they believe it is precisely this kind of "populist" phenomenon that has led to "anti-globalization," "de-globalization," and the "post-truth era." Especially after the "black swan" events of Brexit and Trump's election as U.S. president, Western newspapers, magazines, and online opinion have intensified their calls to "oppose" and "resist" populism. However, using "the proliferation of populism" to explain the frequent social turmoil and political "black swan" phenomena in Western countries in recent years not only fails to thoroughly convince people theoretically but also raises the question: Why does the struggle and outcry of the底层 people [n1] cause such panic among the political elites and capital forces that have been firmly at the center of power for decades, to the point that they frequently mobilize the media machine to "resist" and "condemn" populism?

当前，很多人对于西方社会乃至全球各地频频出现的大规模游行示威、暴力冲突、战争动荡等现象感到困惑不解，尤其不明白长期以来被视为发达、繁荣、自由的欧美“千年王国”为什么会出现诸如“占领华尔街”运动、“茶党”运动、特朗普现象、“桑德斯旋风”，英国脱欧、伦敦骚乱，法国巴黎的“黑夜站立”运动、长期罢工、“黄马甲”运动等现象？然而，面对如此严重的“西方之乱”，欧美主流舆论的反思和归因更令人诧异和茫然。西方政商学界流行以“民粹主义泛滥”来解释2008年金融危机之后开始大量出现的此类社会现象，并且认为正是这类“民粹主义”现象导致“反全球化”“逆全球化”及“后真相时代”等出现。尤其是发生了英国脱欧和特朗普当选美国总统的“黑天鹅”事件后，西方的报纸杂志和网络舆论更是加大力度号召“反对”和“抵制”民粹主义。但是，以“民粹主义泛滥”解释西方各国近几年频发的社会动荡和政治“黑天鹅”现象，不仅不能在理论上彻底说服人，而且还让人产生疑问：为什么底层民众的挣扎和呐喊，让数十年稳固处于统治中心位置的政治精英和资本势力如此恐慌，以至于频频发动传媒机器“抵制”和“谴责”民粹主义？

I. The Vague Concept of "Populism" Cannot Explain "Chaos in the West"

一、驳杂的“民粹”概念不能解释“西方之乱”

(A) The "Signified" of Populism and Its Contradictions under Capitalist Crisis

（一）资本主义危机下的民粹主义“所指”及其矛盾

To analyze whether populism can explain "chaos in the West," we must first understand populism. Although the meanings and understandings of populism to date are quite broad, mixed, vague, and even chaotic, making a consensual definition of populism a theoretical difficulty in itself, when confronting "chaos in the West," we can still roughly clarify the sense in which the concept of populism is being used.

分析民粹主义是否能解释“西方之乱”，首先要理解民粹主义。尽管迄今为止关于民粹主义的含义和理解相当广泛、驳杂、模糊乃至混乱，给民粹主义一个共识性的定义本身是理论难题，但面对“西方之乱”时，我们还是能大体上厘清民粹主义这个概念是在何种意义上被使用的。

A comprehensive analysis of media reports and academic literature that use populism to explain "chaos in the West" reveals that the specific referents of the concept of populism are mainly threefold: first, it refers to the "disorderly resistance" of the masses, such as various "Occupy" movements, the "Nuit Debout" movement, riots, and demonstrations. At the same time, much literature adds qualifiers like "emotional," "irrational," or "angry" to this "disorderly resistance." Second, it refers to left-wing and socialist-leaning forces represented by Sanders, Žižek, and others, including the World Congress of Marxism, the São Paulo Forum, the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties, and other Western left-wing forces, usually regarded as left-wing (radical) populism. Third, it refers to conservative forces represented by the French National Rally and the Trump phenomenon in the United States, generally seen as right-wing (radical) populism.

综合分析各种以民粹主义解释“西方之乱”的媒体报道和学术文献，发现民粹主义概念的具体所指主要有三种：一是指民众“杂乱的反抗”，如各类“占领”运动、“黑夜站立”运动、骚乱及游行等，同时，很多文献中给这些“杂乱的反抗”加上“情绪化的”“非理性的”或“愤怒的”等定语；二是指以桑德斯、齐泽克等为代表的左翼和倾向社会主义的力量，包括世界马克思主义大会、圣保罗论坛、世界工人党和共产党大会等西方左翼力量，通常被视为左翼（极端）民粹主义；三是以法国国民阵线和美国特朗普现象等为代表的保守主义力量，一般被视为右翼（极端）民粹主义。

However, a moment's reflection on these three definitions of populism reveals that, even setting aside many other domestic and international definitions and referents of populism, the three meanings used specifically to explain "chaos in the West" already contain self-contradictions and confusion in usage. Specifically, using the concept of populism to analyze "chaos in the West" involves at least the following three points of contradiction:

然而，只要对上面这三种关于民粹主义的界定稍加思考就会发现，即使撇开国内外其他诸多关于民粹主义的界定和所指，单就解释“西方之乱”时以上三种含义来看，就已经存在自相矛盾和使用混乱的情况。具体而言，以民粹主义概念分析“西方之乱”，至少有以下三点矛盾之处：

First, the rupture and contradiction between the signifier and the signified of the concept. In a general sense, the "signifier" of populism mainly refers to "taking the people as the essence" and "the elite as the essence of the people." "Taking the people as the essence" emphasizes the value and role of the masses, while "the elite as the essence of the people" values the leading role of elites and historical figures in social development. Therefore, overall, the original meaning of the concept of populism embodies the subjectivity of the people. However, current explanations and uses of the concept of populism are mostly pejorative and negative. For example, the "disorderly resistance" of the masses is often extended to mean "the mob" or "ochlocracy," and "populist politicians" are considered to be those who incite popular sentiment. Some even consider anti-science and anti-intellectualism to be manifestations of populism. Thus, although the term populism is widely used, there is a serious rupture between its signifier and signified.

第一，概念的能值与所指之间的断裂和矛盾。在一般意义上，民粹主义的“能指”主要是“以民为粹”和“民之精粹”，“以民为粹”强调人民群众的价值和作用，而“民之精粹”重视精英、历史人物在社会发展中的引领作用。因此，从总体上看，民粹主义概念本意体现的是人民主体性。然而，现在关于民粹主义概念的解释和使用大多是贬义和否定的，如民众“杂乱的反抗”常被引申为“乌合之众”或“暴民政治”，而“民粹政客”被认为是煽动民众情绪者，甚至一些人认为反科学、反智也是民粹主义的表现。可见，民粹主义一词虽然运用非常广泛，但所指和能指之间存在严重断裂。

Second, the self-contradiction among multiple signifieds. This self-contradiction among different signifieds of the concept of populism is most evident in the context of "chaos in the West." Labeling both the left and the right, which have completely different political stances and value orientations, as populism not only creates a logical contradiction but also leads to cognitive errors when people face major issues of principle. In fact, this situation of classifying both left and right as populism, and even linking socialism and fascism respectively with populism, had already provoked strong opposition from left-wing figures in the United States in the 1960s. For instance, the left believed that liberal scholars represented by Hofstadter at the time defined progressives and socialists who were cruelly persecuted by McCarthyism as populists, while also calling McCarthyism populism. This was not only unreasonable but also an insult and injustice to socialists and left-wing victims. [n2]

第二，多种所指之间的自相矛盾。民粹主义概念这种不同所指之间的自相矛盾在“西方之乱”的语境中表现最为明显。把政治立场和价值倾向完全不同的左翼和右翼都称为民粹主义，这不仅造成逻辑上的矛盾，更会导致人们在面对重大原则性问题时出现认识错误。事实上，这些把左翼和右翼都归为民粹主义，甚至把社会主义和法西斯主义也都分别与民粹主义联系起来的情况，在20世纪60年代的美国就已经激起了左翼人士的强烈反对，如左派认为当时以霍夫斯塔特为代表的自由派学者把受到麦卡锡主义残酷迫害的进步人士和社会主义者界定为民粹主义者，同时又把麦卡锡主义也称为民粹主义，这不仅不合理，更是对社会主义者和左派受害者的侮辱和不公。

Third, the contradiction between theoretical and practical criteria for identification. In reality, whether something is "populism" and in what sense it is "populism" has no objective standard; it is more a contest of discursive power and a struggle for dominance in public opinion. The street riots and "color revolutions" launched by Western capitalist rulers to subvert other regimes different from their own are, in the international mainstream opinion they control, portrayed as "just" acts of striving for "democracy," typically exemplified by the "Arab Spring." [n3] However, resistance movements of the底层 people within Western countries, such as the "Occupy Wall Street" movement in the United States and the "Yellow Vests" movement in France, are all defined by capital-controlled opinion as "ochlocracy" of populism or the behavior of anarchist "mobs." This double standard in definition shows that the masses are merely political tools and pawns to be used in the era of "capital supremacy." In the eyes of capital, the masses have no personality, dignity, or basic human needs. Thus, when capital needs the masses, they are deceived, used, or coerced; but when the words and actions of the masses do not align with the interests and intentions of capital, they are denounced as "populism," "tyranny of the majority," "spectators," "the mob," and regarded as "heresy" or "a scourge."

第三，理论和现实认定标准之间的矛盾。现实中，是否为“民粹主义”以及何种意义上的“民粹主义”，其实并无客观标准，更多是话语权的较量和舆论主导权的博弈。西方资本统治者为了颠覆世界上其他异己政权而发动的街头暴动和“颜色革命”，在其掌控的国际主流舆论中就是争取“民主”的“正义”之举，典型如“阿拉伯之春”。而发生在西方国家内部的底层民众反抗运动，如美国“占领华尔街”运动、法国“黄马甲”运动等，则都被资本掌控的舆论界定为民粹主义的“暴民政治”或无政府主义的“乌合之众”行为。这种界定上的双重标准表明，民众在“资本至上”的时代仅是被利用的政治工具和棋子。资本眼中的民众，没有人格、尊严和人的基本需求，所以当资本需要民众时，民众被欺骗、利用或裹挟；而当民众言行不符合资本的利益和意图时，则被斥责为“民粹”“大多数人暴政”“吃瓜群众”“乌合之众”，被视为“异端”或“洪水猛兽”。

(B) The Pejoration of the Concept of Populism and Analysis of Its Causes

（二）民粹主义概念的贬义化及其原因分析

Studying the history of the use of the concept of populism reveals that the contradictions described above did not exist in the early period when the concept of populism emerged; the concept of populism was not originally a pejorative term, nor was it always used to define the "other." Because the term populism originates from the concept of "the people," its basic meanings—such as the people-oriented "taking the people as the essence" and the emphasis on historical figures in "the elite as the essence of the people"—are closely related to relevant ideas within the socialist discourse system. For this reason, even up to the end of World War II, many political parties and figures would be proud to be identified as populists, because it meant being popular with the masses. However, by the 1960s, populism had essentially become a pejorative term, and the combined use of fascism and populism also became commonplace.

研究民粹主义概念使用的历史，发现上文所述这些矛盾在民粹概念产生的早期并不存在，民粹主义概念早期并非一个贬义色彩的词，也不是总被用来定义“他者”。由于民粹主义一词经由“人民”概念而来，其侧重民本思想的“以民为粹”和强调历史人物的“民之精粹”等基本含义都与社会主义话语体系中的相关理念密切相关。正因如此，即使到二战结束前，很多政党和政治人物还会因被认定为民粹主义者而骄傲，因为这意味着受群众欢迎。但是，到了20世纪60年代，民粹主义却基本成了一个具贬义色彩的词，法西斯主义和民粹主义的组合使用也开始稀松平常。

What exactly has caused such a tremendous shift in the basic connotations of populism? In studying the development of populism and the concept of “the people,” the Spanish scholar Marco D’Eramo discovered a crucial point: the systematic use of the term “populism” by academia and political circles is a post-World War II phenomenon, and the formation of this phenomenon precisely corresponds to the abandonment of the term “the people” — that is, the more marginalized the position of “the people” in political discourse, the more central populism becomes. Through his analysis of literature (1920–2013) in the library database of the University of California containing the titles “populism” and “populism and fascism,” he found that after World War II, the use of the term “populism” in Western academia increased exponentially and gradually came to be used together with fascism and totalitarianism. The emergence of this situation is closely related to the large-scale historical revisionist campaign that unfolded in the United States in the 1950s. [4]4 The “historical revisionist campaign” refers to the post-WWII effort by some Western, especially American, historians to reinterpret the history of the Cold War and earlier radical movements, often framing them as threats to liberal democracy and precursors to totalitarianism. Cold War liberal scholars, represented by the American historian Richard Hofstadter, first described the late-19th-century Populist Party movement as a proto-fascist movement, and continuously propagated this view in quality media and mass media, solidifying the pejorative side of populism’s connotations. Finally, through Hofstadter, Daniel Bell, and others describing both the Populist Party movement and McCarthyism as populism, the task of roughly equating populism with fascism was completed.

到底是什么原因让民粹主义的基本内涵悄然发生如此巨大的变化？西班牙学者马柯·德莫拉在研究民粹主义和人民概念发展的过程中，发现了至关重要的一点：学界和政界对民粹主义这一术语的系统性使用是二战之后的现象，该现象的形成恰恰对应的是对“人民”这一术语的弃用，即人民在政治话语中所处的地位越边缘化，民粹主义就越处于核心地位。他通过对美国加州大学图书馆数据库中含有“民粹主义”和“民粹主义与法西斯主义”标题的文献（1920—2013）进行分析发现，二战之后，在西方学界对民粹主义的使用存在指数递增现象，并逐渐同法西斯主义、集权主义放在一起使用。而上述这种情况的出现，与20世纪50年代在美国展开的大规模历史修正主义行动密切相关。以美国历史学家理查德·霍夫斯塔特为代表的冷战自由派学者，首先将19世纪末的平民党运动描述为原始法西斯主义运动，并不断在优质传媒和大众传媒上传播，固化民粹主义内涵中贬义的一面，最后经由霍夫斯塔特、丹尼尔·贝尔等人通过将人民党运动和麦卡锡主义等都描述为民粹主义，大致完成了将民粹主义和法西斯主义等同起来的任务。

Although this definition and use of populism already provoked strong opposition from Western leftists at the time, this could not change the new image of populism — full of contempt and derogation — established in international academia by the dominant Hofstadter and others. Especially after Hofstadter led a famous conference on populism held at the London School of Economics in 1967, his views on populism came to dominate the field of political science, namely that populism is equivalent to fascism.

尽管在当时这种对民粹主义的界定和使用就已经激起了西方左翼人士的强烈反对，但这却不能改变处于强势地位的霍夫斯塔特等人在国际学术界为民粹主义确立的充满蔑视和贬义的新形象，尤其在霍夫斯塔特主导下，伦敦政治经济学院于1967年召开了一次关于民粹主义的著名会议之后，他关于民粹主义的见解在政治学领域占据了主导地位，即民粹主义等同于法西斯主义。

In the process of being pejorativized, populism gradually became equated with Nazism, “the mob,” “the tyranny of the majority,” and so on, while its original meaning and glory disappeared. A term that originally represented the theories and activities of progressive people pursuing fairness and justice turned into an “academic concept” that seemed to criticize the irrational emotions of the masses from a “neutral,” “objective,” and “independent” standpoint. Thus, the paradox we see everywhere today is: “capitalism,” which once brought humanity disasters and suffering such as war, genocide, and colonial rule, is not only not condemned or denounced but is instead replaced by ideologies such as “civilization,” “advanced,” and “success” and widely praised; while theories and practical activities that concern the interests of the masses are severely belittled, even wantonly slandered and defamed, in the name of “populism.” As the American scholar James Petras has revealed, in the modern dictionary of empire, the most abused and deliberately confused concept is “populism.” This concept originated in the movements of oppressed workers. The cultural ideology of empire, by borrowing and distorting positive concepts linked to the struggle for liberation, combines populism with hegemonic theories and reactionary regimes, hollowing out the original progressive and liberating content of the concept of populism, linking it with a reactionary, racist, xenophobic, and fascist ideology, and ultimately portraying everything related to the independent movement of the people as backward.

在被贬义化的过程中，民粹主义逐渐与纳粹、“乌合之众”、“多数人暴政”等同起来，自身最初的含义和荣光消失不见，一个最初代表进步人士追求公平正义理论和活动的词，变成了一个似乎以“中性”“客观”“独立”立场批判民众非理性情绪的“学术概念”。这样，在当下我们随处可见的悖论是：曾经给人类带来战争、种族灭绝、殖民统治等灾难和痛苦的“资本主义”，不仅不被讨伐和谴责，反而被置换为“文明”“先进”“成功”等意识形态受到广泛赞美；而关注人民大众利益的理论和实践活动，却被以“民粹主义”的名义而遭到严重贬低，甚至是肆意抹黑和污蔑。正如美国学者詹姆斯·佩特拉斯所揭示的，在帝国的现代词典中，滥用最多并企图搞混的观念就是“民粹主义”，这一概念起源于被压迫的工人群众运动，而帝国的文化意识形态借助并扭曲同争取解放斗争有联系的积极观念，将民粹主义与霸道的理论和倒退的政权相结合，掏空了民粹主义概念原有的进步、解放内容，将其与一种反动的、种族主义的、排外的和法西斯主义意识形态联系起来，最终将所有与人民独立运动相关的事物都宣传为倒退。

In domestic academia, people also often use populism in association with Nazism, nationalism, socialism, and so on. Since nationalism is considered to lead to war and fascism, linking these concepts together often implies: fascism ≈ extreme nationalism ≈ populism ≈ socialism. That is, the ultimate target is still socialism, which today has actual influence globally through its ideological and material existence and poses a challenge to the logic of capital and imperialist hegemony.

在国内学术界，也经常有人把民粹主义和纳粹主义、民族主义、社会主义等关联起来使用。由于民族主义被认为会导致战争和法西斯主义，把这些概念联系起来使用，经常隐含的意思是：法西斯主义≈极端民族主义≈民粹主义≈社会主义，即最终目的还是指向当今在全球因思想和实体存在而具有实际影响力、并且对资本逻辑和帝国主义霸权形成挑战的社会主义。

The pejorative use of the concept of populism also directly affects the evaluation of related history. Today, a large body of literature considers the Russian populist movement of the late 19th century and the American Populist Party movement as the main origins of populist politics and thought. Among this, much literature describes and evaluates the above history with negative and pejorative terms, such as considering the Russian populist movement historically reactionary, and claiming that Lenin held a sharply critical attitude toward the Russian populists. As for the American Populist Party movement, many accounts strip away the historical background of the Great Depression of the 1930s in which it arose, yet deliberately magnify the racist tendencies of some of its leaders, emphasizing it as an early fascist movement.

民粹主义概念贬义化使用，也直接影响到对相关历史的评价。现今，大量文献认为19世纪后半期的俄国民粹派运动和美国人民党运动是民粹主义政治及思潮的主要起源。而这其中，又有很多文献以消极和贬义的语词描述并评价上述历史，如认为俄国民粹派运动在历史上是反动的，列宁对俄国民粹派持激烈批判态度；而对于美国人民党运动，很多论述剥离其产生的20世纪30年代经济大萧条等历史背景，却刻意放大其中某些领导者具有的种族主义倾向，强调其是早期的法西斯主义运动。

However, when one truly delves into history, it becomes clear that both of these movements had their own historical backgrounds and specific causes, as well as their progressiveness in safeguarding the interests of the broad masses. The Russian populist movement went through three stages and contributed to the historical turning point of modern Russia. It was not, as some articles claim, a representative of backward and ultra-conservative forces. On the contrary, the Russian populists played a very progressive and revolutionary role in history. First, the revolutionary elements who called themselves populists (narodniki) abandoned their social status, and even their freedom and lives, to transform the serfdom society — a spirit of self-sacrifice worthy of respect from later generations. Second, the populists were the earliest group in Russia to spread Marxism. The translators of the first two Russian editions of the *Communist Manifesto* (Bakunin in 1869 and Zasulich in 1882) were both populist theorists, and the formation of Marx and Engels’ “theory of Eastern society” was also inseparable from the influence of the Russian populists. [5]5 The “theory of Eastern society” refers to Marx and Engels’ late writings on the possibility of non-capitalist paths to socialism in societies like Russia, based on the survival of the rural commune (obshchina), a topic on which they corresponded with Russian populist thinkers. Finally, Lenin’s attitude toward the populists went through two different stages in his revolutionary career. In the early period before he came to the historical stage, from 1893 to 1905, Lenin mainly held a critical attitude toward the populists, writing articles such as *What the “Friends of the People” Are and How They Fight the Social-Democrats*, *The Economic Content of Narodism and the Criticism of It in Mr. Struve’s Book*, and *What Legacy Do We Renounce?* to debate with them. But after 1905, when his revolutionary thinking was more mature, Lenin increasingly identified with the revolutionary program and propositions of the populists, contrary to the view held by some articles that Lenin was always opposed to the populists. The practice in many articles today of using Lenin’s early criticism of the Russian populists as a basis to completely negate the Russian populist movement is a matter that requires further discussion.

然而，当真正深入历史就会发现，这两场运动都有其产生的历史背景和具体原因，也有其在维护广大民众利益时的进步性。俄国民粹派运动前后经历三个阶段，为推动俄国近现代历史转折作出了贡献，并非一些文章中所说的是落后和极端保守势力的代表，恰恰相反，俄国民粹派在历史上曾经起过非常进步和革命的作用。首先，以民粹派自称的革命分子为变革农奴制社会而放弃社会地位乃至自由和生命的献身精神值得后人敬重。其次，民粹派是俄国最早传播马克思主义的群体，《共产党宣言》最早两个俄文版翻译者（1869年巴枯宁和1882查苏里奇）都是民粹派理论家，而马克思、恩格斯“东方社会理论”的形成也离不开俄国民粹派的影响。最后，列宁在革命生涯中，对民粹派的态度经历了前后两个不同的阶段。列宁在登上历史舞台前期的1893年至1905年，对民粹派主要持批判态度，写了《什么是“人民之友”以及他们如何攻击社会民主党人》《民粹主义的经济内容及其司徒卢威先生的书中受到的批判》《我们究竟拒绝什么遗产》等文章同民粹派论战；但到革命思想更加成熟的1905年之后，列宁对民粹派的革命纲领和主张越来越持认同态度，而非一些文章所认为列宁一直对民粹派持反对态度。现今很多文章中以列宁在革命早期对俄国民粹派的批判为依据，全面否定俄国民粹派的做法，是需要商榷的。

Some articles argue that the massive Populist movement that arose in the United States in the late 19th century, led primarily by farmers and commoners opposing financial and oil monopoly oligarchs, also represents an origin of populism. An analysis of the existing literature on the American Populist movement reveals that most scholars hold a negative attitude toward this movement. In fact, this 30-year-long Populist movement was the first large-scale mass movement in American history, making the monopoly oligarchs of the United States witness the power of resistance from the底层 people. Out of fear and disgust toward this power, the Populist movement was subsequently subjected to constant belittling descriptions and evaluations. As can be seen from Howard Zinn’s *A People’s History of the United States*, the major capital groups and conservative elites went to great lengths to belittle and even smear mass movements represented by the Populists, calling them terrifying “populism,” while the left wing regarded such movements as the rightful resistance of the底层 people, showing sympathy and respect for the masses. Engels at the time took note of the struggle movements of the broad American masses. In his letters to friends or newspaper editors during this period, he repeatedly discussed the struggles of the American working class. For example, in a letter to a friend in 1886, he pointed out: “Whatever mistakes the leaders of the movement and the partially awakening masses may make, however narrow their thinking, one thing is clear: the American working class has entered the movement, of that there is no doubt. After some detours, they will soon get on the right track. I consider the entry of the Americans onto the stage to be one of the most important events of this year. The outbreak of the class war in America means for the bourgeoisie of the whole world what the collapse of the Tsarist autocracy meant for the major military monarchies of Europe—the collapse of their main pillar.”

一些文章认为19世纪末期在美国掀起的声势浩大的以农场主和平民为主体反对金融、石油垄断寡头的人民党运动，也是民粹主义起源的表现。分析现有关于美国人民党运动的文献，发现大多数学者对于这场运动持消极态度。其实，这场长达30年的人民党运动，是美国历史上第一次大规模的群众运动，使美国垄断寡头们见识了底层民众反抗的力量。出于对这种力量的恐惧和厌恶，后来人民党运动被不断贬低化描述和评价。从霍德华·津恩的《美国人民的历史》一书中可以看出，对以人民党为代表的民众运动，各大资本集团和保守主义精英极力贬低甚至抹黑，称其为恐怖的“民粹主义”，而左翼则认为这类运动是底层民众应有反抗，对人民群众抱以同情和敬重态度。恩格斯在当时就注意到美国广大民众的斗争运动，他这一时期给朋友或报刊负责人的信中，多次谈到美国劳动者群体的斗争，如1886年写给朋友的信中，他指出：“不管运动的领袖以及部分开始觉醒的群众会犯什么错误，思想多么狭隘，有一点是清楚的，即美国工人阶级投入了运动，这是毫无疑问的。在走过一些弯路之后，他们将很快地走上正轨。我认为，美国人登上舞台，是今年最重要的事件之一。美国阶级战争的爆发，对全世界的资产阶级来说，犹如俄国沙皇制度的崩溃对欧洲各大军事君主国来说一样，意味着它们的主要支柱的垮台。”

In summary, the concept of populism has undergone a continuous process of pejoration, turning this concept, which originally represented progress, liberation, and the supremacy of the people, into a generalized and labeled term. It exhibits the nature of a discursive tool in political struggle, not only failing to explain the root causes of the “chaos in the West” but also serving as an excuse for capital forces and their agents to shirk responsibility and cover up the crisis. As Marxists, we need to stand on the side of the masses, redirect the perspective for analyzing the current “chaos in the West” back to the Marxist field of vision, and use Marxist theory to analyze the root causes of the problem. We must not allow a concept as ambiguous, equivocal, and seemingly mysterious as populism to serve as a tool and bargaining chip in political struggle, covering up the roots and essence of the Western social crisis while simultaneously smearing the底层 masses, who have already borne the disasters and suffering caused by the economic crisis, as the “instigators” of the crisis and turmoil.

综上所述，民粹主义概念经历了一个不断贬义化的过程，使得这个最早代表进步、解放、人民至上的概念被泛化、标签化使用，表现出政治斗争的话语工具性质，使其不仅不能说明“西方之乱”的根源所在，同时还成为资本力量及其代理人推脱责任、掩盖危机的借口。作为马克思主义者，我们需要站在人民群众立场上，把分析当前“西方之乱”的视角拉回马克思主义视野，以马克思主义理论分析问题的根源所在，而不能让民粹主义这样一个充满歧义、模棱两可又似乎神秘莫测的概念作为政治斗争的工具和砝码，在掩盖西方社会危机根源和本质的同时，还让已经承担了经济危机引起的灾难和痛苦的底层民众被污蔑为危机、动荡的“始作俑者”。

II. Marxist Crisis Theory Is the Theoretical Weapon for Analyzing the “Chaos in the West”

二、马克思主义危机理论是分析“西方之乱”的理论武器

(A) Economic Crisis Is the Inevitable Result of the Endogenous Contradictions of Capitalism

（一）经济危机是资本主义内生性矛盾的必然结果

In studying the process and laws of capitalist economic operation, Marx discovered major issues such as the secret of the generation of surplus value and the fundamental contradictions of the capitalist system. In the era of free competition capitalism in which Marx lived, the contradiction between productive forces and relations of production was the root cause of the periodic outbreak of economic crises in capitalist society. In an era when capital appreciation mainly relied on commodity production to obtain surplus value, producing more commodities (W) was the key link for the smooth progress of the capital appreciation process G—W—G′. The acquisition of超额 profits by capitalists and the greater realization of capital accumulation both required commodity production as an intermediary. However, the transformation of the use value of commodities into value is a “dangerous leap,” requiring effective demand as a condition. Due to the nature of capitalist private ownership of the relations of production, only a minority in capitalist society own the means of production, while the vast majority are “free and propertyless” workers who can only survive by selling their labor power for meager wages. They are unable to consume the large quantities of commodities produced by the capitalist class. Therefore, it is inevitable that “the working class is enraged by insufficient consumer goods, while the upper class is ruined by overproduction.”

在研究资本主义经济运行过程和规律时，马克思发现了剩余价值产生的奥秘和资本主义制度基本矛盾等重大问题。在马克思生活的自由竞争资本主义时代，生产力和生产关系之间的矛盾是导致资本主义社会经济危机周期性爆发的根源。在资本增殖主要依靠商品生产获取剩余价值的时代，为了使资本增值的G—W—G′过程顺利进行，生产更多的商品（W）是关键环节。资本家超额利润的获取和更大程度实现资本积累，都需要以商品生产为中介，但商品的使用价值向价值转换是“惊险的一跃”，需要有支付能力的需求作为条件。由于资本主义私有制的生产关系性质，资本主义社会中只有少数人占有生产资料，绝大多数人是“自由的一无所有”、只能靠出卖劳动力获取低廉工资生存的工人，他们没有能力消费资本家阶级大量生产的商品，所以“工人阶级因消费品不足而激怒愤懑，上层阶级则因生产过剩而倾家荡产”的情况在所难免。

The contradiction between socialized production and capitalist private ownership leads to the social wealth generated by the progress of productive forces ultimately being possessed only by a small minority. Therefore, in the capitalist system, overproduction and underconsumption occur simultaneously. Moreover, this system, which excludes the majority of society from sharing wealth, also leads to the simultaneous appearance of overproduction, absolute poverty, and polarization. Regarding the reality that this capitalist private ownership of the means of production intensifies the fundamental contradiction and triggers economic crises, Marx once used vivid language to describe it: “The bourgeois relations of production and exchange, the bourgeois property relations—this modern bourgeois society, which has conjured up such gigantic means of production and exchange as if by magic, now resembles the sorcerer who is no longer able to control the powers of the underworld that he has called up by his spells.”

社会化生产和资本主义私人占有之间的矛盾导致生产力进步所带来的社会财富最终只是被一小部分人占有，因此，资本主义制度中，生产过剩和消费不足现象同时出现，而且，这种排斥社会中大多数人分享财富的制度使得生产过剩和绝对贫困、两极分化等现象也同时出现。对资本主义这种私人占有生产资料而导致基本矛盾激化和经济危机爆发的现实，马克思曾经用形象的语言进行描述：“资产阶级的生产关系和交换关系，资产阶级的所有制关系，这个曾仿佛用法术创造了如此庞大的生产资料和交换手段的现代资产阶级社会，现在像一个魔法师一样不能再支配自己用法术呼唤出来的魔鬼了。”

To date, capitalism has gone through different stages of development, but its fundamental contradiction remains unchanged. Whether in the era of state monopoly capitalism in which Lenin lived or in the current era dominated by international financial monopoly capital, the root cause of financial and economic crises remains the fundamental contradiction of the capitalist system. The contradiction between private capital’s endless pursuit of profit and the limited consumption capacity of the broad masses not only leads to an oversupply of physical commodities, causing economic crises, but also, after the 1980s, began to lead to an oversupply of financial products, creating a false prosperity fueled by the expansion of financial bubbles. Once the financial bubble bursts, as it did on Wall Street in 2008, the crisis inevitably spreads rapidly from the virtual economy to the real economy, and also gradually expands from the economic sphere to the political and social spheres, triggering political storms and social unrest. After the 2008 financial and economic crisis broke out in the United States, it quickly spread globally. The various phenomena manifested as the “chaos in the West” are precisely the political and social effects of this economic crisis.

迄今为止，资本主义经历了不同的发展阶段，但其基本矛盾仍然没变，无论是列宁生活的国家垄断资本主义时期，还是当今国际金融垄断资本主义主宰的时代，导致金融危机和经济危机的根源依然是资本主义制度的基本矛盾。私人资本无限追逐利润与广大民众有限消费能力之间的矛盾，不仅导致实物商品过剩，造成经济危机，在20世纪80年代之后，更开始导致大量金融产品过剩，形成金融泡沫膨胀制造的虚假繁荣，而一旦金融泡沫如2008年在美国华尔街那样破灭，必然导致危机从虚拟经济领域向实体经济领域迅速蔓延，同时也会逐渐从经济领域扩展到政治领域和社会领域，引发政治风波和社会动荡。2008年金融经济危机在美国爆发后，迅速向全球蔓延，表现为“西方之乱”的种种现象，正是这场经济危机的政治效应和社会效应。

In the current era dominated by international financial monopoly capital, the causes and direct consequences of economic crises differ significantly from those in the era of free competition capitalism and the era of state monopoly capitalism.

在当今国际金融垄断资本主宰的时代，经济危机的爆发原因和直接后果都与自由竞争资本主义时期、国家垄断资本主义时期有重大不同。

First, in the era of international financial monopoly capital, financial and economic crises are not only periodic phenomena inevitably caused by the fundamental contradiction of capitalism but may also be artificially manufactured financial weapons and economic warfare. As capitalism has developed into the era of international financial monopoly, the degree of global economic and financial monopoly has increased. Military-industrial-financial monopoly conglomerates, formed by the fusion of large banks and multinational corporations, manipulate the U.S. government, the Federal Reserve, and international power-financial institutions such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organization from behind the scenes. They seek monopoly profits by expanding their spheres of influence and establishing a global empire, while simultaneously launching financial wars in more covert ways to destroy the economies of other countries. The neoliberal policies representing the interests of transnational monopoly financial capital, promoted globally under the name of the “Washington Consensus,” also provide ideological justification for international monopoly capital forces to control the global political and economic landscape and its direction.

第一，在国际金融垄断资本时代，金融经济危机不仅是资本主义基本矛盾必然导致的周期性现象，同时还可能是人为制造的金融武器与经济战争。资本主义发展到国际金融垄断时代，全球经济、金融垄断程度更高，由大银行和跨国公司融合而成的军事—工业—金融垄断财团在背后操纵美国政府、美联储和世界银行、国际货币基金组织、世界贸易组织等国际权力—金融机构，通过扩大势力范围与建立全球帝国来谋求垄断利润，同时以更加隐蔽的方式发动金融战争、摧毁他国经济。而代表跨国垄断金融资本利益的新自由主义政策以“华盛顿共识”的名义在全球不断推行，也为国际垄断资本势力控制全球政治经济格局及走向提供了意识形态辩护。

Second, in terms of consequences, a financial and economic crisis may not only fail to collapse the ruling order dominated by financial oligarchs, but may instead become an opportunity for them to continue enriching themselves. In the current neoliberal period, the international finance-monopoly capital that creates crises, because it possesses super-strong control, can not only avoid bankruptcy, imprisonment, or desperate suicide, but can instead hijack the administrative power of the state and manipulate public policy, forcing ordinary people to use their hard-earned money and pensions to "transfuse blood" for it. After the 2008 US financial crisis broke out, Wall Street "financial crocodiles" represented by Goldman Sachs not only emerged unscathed, but received massive bailout funds from the US government. The Obama administration, whose president came to power by loudly denouncing "Wall Street fat cats," nevertheless produced a crisis governance plan that exhibited the characteristic of "using neoliberalism to save neoliberalism," all of which demonstrates capital's control over administrative power. As for Trump, who during his campaign criticized Wall Street even more fiercely in rhetoric and deceived a large number of grassroots voters for their ballots, his administration members were mainly composed of economic monopoly oligarchs and political conservatives.

第二，从后果来看，金融经济危机可能不仅不会导致金融寡头主宰的统治秩序崩塌，反而成为他们继续发财致富的机会。在当前新自由主义时期，制造危机的国际金融垄断资本因具有超强的控制力，不但能免于破产、牢狱之灾或绝望自杀，反而可以绑架政府行政力量并操控公共政策，让普通大众以血汗钱、养老金为自己“输血”。2008年美国金融危机爆发之后，高盛公司为代表的华尔街“金融大鳄”不仅毫发无损，反而得到美国政府大笔救助资金，以大骂“华尔街肥猫”上台的总统奥巴马，其政府的危机治理方案却呈现出“以新自由主义挽救新自由主义”的特点，无不说明资本对行政权力的掌控。而竞选时在言语上更加激烈批评华尔街、骗取大量底层民众选票的特朗普，其政府成员却主要由经济上的垄断寡头和政治上的保守主义者组成。

In sum, in the era of international finance-monopoly capital, economic crises can be artificially manufactured, and their timing and location can be manipulated; the global ruling power possessed by transnational monopoly capital, especially the scale, capability, and elusive movements of international finance-monopoly capital, is sufficient to overturn the currencies and economies of some sovereign states; because the perpetrators of crises possess unprecedented political, economic, and cultural control, they can not only use the crisis to make money, but can also shift the responsibility for the crisis onto grassroots people or onto countries like China that are in a weak position in the international public opinion arena. The rule of contemporary finance-monopoly capital is "large yet formless" and "deep yet colorless," and is also more concealed and penetrating in ideology. Therefore, only after an economic crisis breaks out can the oligarchic capital that created the crisis become the object of government bailouts, while the angry and helpless resistance movements of the people who bear the disastrous consequences of the crisis are labeled as "evil" and disgusting populism, or they are denounced as "madmen," "anarchist hooligans," and "socialists."

总之，国际金融垄断资本时代，经济危机可以人为制造，时间和地点都可以操控；跨国垄断资本具有的全球统治力量，尤其是国际金融垄断资本规模之大、能力之强、行踪之诡秘，足以颠覆一些主权国家的货币和经济；危机的肇事者由于具有史无前例的政治、经济、文化控制力，不仅可以利用危机发财，还能把危机爆发的责任推卸到底层民众身上或中国这样在国际舆论场上处于弱势地位的国家身上。当代金融垄断资本的统治“大而无形”且“深而无色”，在意识形态上也更加隐蔽和具有渗透性，因此，才能在经济危机爆发后，制造危机的寡头资本成为政府救助的对象，而把承担危机灾难性后果却愤怒、无助的民众反抗运动说成“罪恶的”、令人生厌的民粹主义，或者指责他们是“疯子”“无政府主义小混混”以及“社会主义者”。

(2) Does Capitalist Crisis Necessarily Lead to Proletarian Revolution?

（二）资本主义危机必然导致无产阶级革命？

In common understanding, economic crisis signals that capitalism is about to meet its end, and the outbreak of crisis also means the arrival of an era of revolution. However, the phenomena currently prevalent in Europe and America that fall within the conceptual scope of populism indicate that the relationship between capitalist crisis and socialist revolution is complex. The outbreak of economic crisis is only one of the conditions for revolution to occur; a highly revolutionary proletarian movement requires the convergence of many subjective and objective factors before it can take place.

一般的认识中，经济危机预示着资本主义即将走向末路，危机的爆发也意味着革命时代的到来，然而，当前盛行于欧美的这些包括民粹主义概念范围内的现象则表明，资本主义危机与社会主义革命之间的关系是复杂的，经济危机的爆发只是革命发生的条件之一，无产阶级运动高度的革命需要具备许多主客观因素才能发生。

The fundamental contradiction between productive forces and relations of production in capitalist society causes crisis to become an inevitable "chronic disease" in economic and social operations. At the same time, crisis also provides the necessary preconditions for war or revolution. Marx pointed out in "Revolution in China and in Europe": "War or revolution, if not the result of a general commercial and industrial crisis, cannot profoundly shake Europe; the arrival of such a crisis is always signaled first by Britain, because it is the representative of European industry on the world market." On the basis of analyzing the history of modern European wars, Marx further stated: "Since the beginning of the eighteenth century, there has been no serious revolution in Europe that was not preceded by a commercial and financial crisis. The revolution of 1789 was like this, and the revolution of 1848 was also like this." Therefore, economic crisis and the social crisis it causes are objective conditions that accelerate the demise of capitalism; in other words, capitalist crisis is a condition that promotes proletarian revolution. In a capitalist economic crisis, a large number of proletarians are thoroughly cast out of the system, which is why the possibility of revolution against the entire capitalist system exists.

资本主义社会生产力和生产关系之间的基本矛盾导致危机成为经济、社会运行中必然出现的“顽疾”，同时，危机也为战争或革命提供了必要的前提条件。马克思在《中国革命和欧洲革命》中指出：“战争或革命，如果不是工商业普遍危机的结果，都不能深刻地震撼欧洲，这种危机的到来总是由英国先发信号，因为它是欧洲工业在世界市场上的代表”。马克思在分析近代欧洲战争历史的基础上进一步指出：“欧洲从十八世纪初没有一次严重的革命事先没有商业危机和财政危机。1789年的革命是这样，1848年的革命也是这样。”因此，经济危机以及由此导致的社会危机是加速资本主义灭亡的客观条件，换言之，资本主义危机是促使无产阶级革命的条件。在资本主义经济危机中，有大量无产者被彻底地甩出体系之外，所以才有针对整个资本主义体系革命的可能性。

However, capitalist crisis does not necessarily lead to a highly revolutionary proletariat. Historical facts show that crisis will inevitably erupt, yet it cannot automatically bring forth a completely new mode of production fundamentally different from the principles of capitalist society. In a capitalist crisis, worker unemployment, factory closures, social chaos, political turmoil, and even war are common phenomena. A progressive and constructive highly revolutionary proletariat, however, requires specific conditions to emerge; this is also the reason why the possibility of revolution against the capitalist system is not a guaranteed possibility.

但是，资本主义危机并不必然导致无产阶级高度的革命化。历史事实表明，危机必然会爆发，然而它无法自动带出与资本主义社会原则根本不同的一种全新的生产方式。在资本主义危机中，工人失业、工厂倒闭、社会混乱及政治动荡乃至战争是常见现象，而具有进步性、建设性的无产阶级高度的革命则需要满足特定条件才可能出现，这也是针对资本主义体系革命的可能性不是一种被保证的可能性之原因。

First, a highly revolutionary proletariat necessarily requires that workers rise to become the proletariat, that is, the revolutionary subject must be a class that "has risen to the point of being able to theoretically understand the entire historical movement," and cannot be "masses scattered across the country and divided by competition." Second, the process of workers rising to become the proletariat requires conscious forging and conscious intervention. The proletariat is not "delivered" by capitalist society, but is continuously forged in the struggle of workers against capitalist society. Without the conscious intervention and conscious forging of the revolutionary subject, workers will often "fight not against their own enemy, but against the enemy of their own enemy," or "will become a spiritually atrophied, intellectually backward, inwardly empty, and docile mass, a mass that cannot achieve liberation by its own strength."

第一，无产阶级高度的革命化必然要求工人上升为无产阶级，即革命主体必须是“已经提高到能从理论上认识整个历史运动”的阶级，而不能是“分散在全国各地并为竞争所分裂的群众”。第二，工人上升为无产阶级这个过程需要自觉锻造和自觉介入。无产阶级并不是资本主义社会“端送”出来的，而是在工人反抗资本主义社会的斗争中不断锻造出来的。如果没有革命主体的自觉介入和自觉锻造，工人将往往可能“不是同自己的敌人作斗争，而是同自己的敌人的敌人作斗争”，或者“就会成为精神萎缩、智力落后、内心空虚、任人宰割的群众，这样的群众是不可能用自己的力量取得解放的”。

So how can the proletariat, as the revolutionary subject, consciously intervene and be forged? A very important link is thought, that is, the scientific theory guiding revolution being grasped by workers and the masses. Both theory and reality show that in the political revolution of the proletariat, the problem of thought requires organization to implement it. But within the working class, debates on the issues of organization and party-building have never been settled, among which the most incisive and typical is the understanding and debate between Rosa Luxemburg and Lenin on this issue. To this day, the problems of thought and organization in revolutionary struggle remain the greatest difficulties in the world socialist movement. Currently, solving how "thought" can be grasped by the masses through the method of "organization" is also a key link in promoting the world socialist movement. And the "disorderly resistance of the people" precisely indicates the reality that the revolutionary thought of the proletariat has not been grasped by the masses, and that a highly revolutionary proletariat is absent. When the masses are cast out of the capitalist production system and are also armed with proletarian revolutionary thought, they become a vital force for communist revolution; but if the masses are used and deceived by the conservative forces of monopoly capitalism, they are very likely to become cannon fodder for imperialist wars or victims of fascism. The "disorderly resistance" of the people manifested in the "chaos in the West" precisely demonstrates the current inadequacy of popular movements in terms of class consciousness, organization, awareness, and combativeness. It is precisely because the people's angry emotions and resistance movements lack the height of communist revolution and the perspective of socialism that they are disorderly, chaotic, and powerless, and are contemptuously defined by the power of capital as pejorative populism.

那么，作为革命主体的无产阶级如何才能自觉介入和锻造出来？一个非常重要的环节是思想，即指导革命的科学理论被工人、群众所掌握。理论和现实都表明，在无产阶级的政治革命中，思想问题需要组织来担当落实。但在工人阶级内部，在组织和建党问题上的争论，从来没有完结，其中最切中要害和最为典型的是罗莎·卢森堡与列宁在这个问题上的认识及争论。至今，革命斗争中的思想问题和组织问题仍是世界社会主义运动中的最大难题。当前，解决“思想”如何通过“组织”的方式被群众所掌握，也是推动世界社会主义运动的关键环节。而“民众杂乱地反抗”恰恰表明无产阶级的革命思想没有被群众掌握，以及无产阶级高度的革命缺席的现实。当民众被甩出资本主义生产体系之外，又被无产阶级革命思想所武装时，他们就是共产主义革命的有生力量；而如果民众被垄断资本主义保守力量利用和欺骗，就极有可能成为帝国主义战争的炮灰或法西斯主义的牺牲品。“西方之乱”中表现出来的民众“杂乱地反抗”，说明的正是当前民众运动在阶级意识、组织性、觉悟性和战斗性方面的不足。民众的愤怒情绪和反抗运动正是由于缺乏共产主义革命的高度和社会主义视野，所以杂乱无序且无力，还被资本力量轻蔑地界定为贬义化的民粹主义。

Which theory and force controls and influences the broad masses is a major issue concerning the global political direction. The crux of the problem is how to view the people and how to treat the people; who can win victory fundamentally depends on the mobilization and winning over of the mass base. The people are very complex and are an indispensable foundation for any political movement. The people are the most basic political building material; any political force that wants to develop most needs to win over as many masses as possible. As a kind of political building material, the people do not naturally belong to the left or the right; the key is which kind of thought and organization influences them. If influenced by left-wing thought and groups, they may develop into a revolutionary movement for self-liberation; if deceptively utilized by conservative rightists, they are very likely to become cannon fodder for fascist or racist wars; of course, they may also, as in most times now, be in a state of bewilderment, ignorance, disunity, lack of organization, and scattered like loose sand — that is, dispersed, atomized, disorderly individual struggles, which, due to their weak strength, are easily smeared, framed, and suppressed by the rulers.

广大民众被何种理论和力量掌控、影响是关系到全球政治走向的重大问题。问题的关键是如何看待民众和如何对待人民，谁能够赢得胜利根本上取决于群众基础的动员和争取。民众是非常复杂的，是任何政治运动不可或缺的基础。民众是最基本的政治建筑材料，任何政治力量想要有所发展，最需要的就是争取尽可能多的群众。民众作为一种政治建筑材料，并不天然属于左派或者右派，关键看其到底受到何种思想和组织的影响。如果受左翼思想和团体影响，可能发展为解放自身的革命运动；如果被保守主义右翼欺骗性利用，极可能成为法西斯主义或种族主义战争的炮灰；当然，也可能像现在这样的大多数时候，民众处于茫然、无知、涣散、无组织和一盘散沙状态，那就是分散的、原子化的、无序的个体抗争，因力量弱小极易被统治者抹黑、诬陷和镇压。

It is precisely for this reason that the vilification of Marx himself, the severe demonization of Marxism, and the propaganda portraying communism as an unspeakable "monster and flood" have been the constant work of bourgeois theory. Its aim is to separate the masses from the truly scientific theoretical weapon that could liberate them, and to infiltrate, induce, corrupt, and numb the class consciousness of the masses through various religious, material, pragmatic, nihilistic, and even terrorist ideas. When the oligarchic capital group fears that the masses might grasp Marxism as the "weapon of theory" [n12], yet can no longer use bourgeois theory to explain the plight, economic crisis, and the root and essence of social turmoil facing the masses, it has no choice but to use the incongruous concept of "populism" to steer the issue toward an even more mysterious and obscure direction. In fact, against the backdrop of capitalist crisis, what lies hidden behind the concept of populism are class issues and national issues. "The foreigner issue is actually the national issue as understood in traditional political science; the issue of the lower classes pursuing social justice is the class issue as understood in traditional political science. If class issues and national issues were stated directly, not only politicians but also ordinary people would understand the essence of the problem and know what should be done."

正因如此，马克思本人被抹黑、马克思主义被严重妖魔化、把共产主义宣传为不可名状的“洪水猛兽”，就是资产阶级理论一直在做的事，目的就是把人民群众和解放他们的真正科学理论武器隔离开来，以各种宗教的、物质的、实用主义的、虚无主义的，乃至恐怖主义的观念渗透、诱导、腐化、麻痹大众的阶级意识。当寡头资本集团担心民众掌握马克思主义这一“武器的理论”，却不能继续以资产阶级理论说明民众面临的困境、经济危机和社会动荡的根源和本质时，只能用不伦不类的“民粹”概念把问题引向更加神秘和模糊的方向。而事实上，在资本主义危机背景下，民粹主义概念背后掩盖的是阶级问题和民族问题，“外国人问题其实是传统政治学所说的民族问题，底层民众追求社会公正的问题是传统政治学所说的阶级问题，如果直接把阶级问题和民族问题讲出来，不仅政治家，连普通民众也都会明白问题的本质，并知道应该怎么办了”。

III. The Current Danger of Fascism and the Urgency of Reviving World Socialism

三、当前法西斯主义的危险性和复兴世界社会主义的紧迫性

Equally important as exposing the ideological fog concealed within the concept of populism is fully recognizing another major practical issue that the pejorative and label-like use of "populism" happens to illuminate: namely, the danger of the world currently sliding into fascism and the urgency of reviving the world socialist movement.

与揭示掩盖在民粹主义概念中的意识形态迷雾同等重要的，是充分认识贬义化和标签化的民粹主义恰好能说明的另一个重大现实问题，即当前世界陷入法西斯主义的危险性和复兴世界社会主义运动的紧迫性。

When world capitalism falls into an economic crisis, it inevitably faces the question of where to go. Broadly speaking, there are three main possibilities: first, moving forward, borrowing from socialism to implement reformist policies, such as the New Deal under Franklin D. Roosevelt; second, the outbreak of a communist revolution; third, falling into an even more extreme and darker fascism.

当世界资本主义陷入经济危机时，必然面临向何处去的问题。大致而言，主要有三种可能性，一是向前走，借鉴社会主义实施改良政策，如罗斯福新政；二是发生共产主义革命；三是陷入更加极端和黑暗的法西斯主义。

From a global perspective, since the outbreak of the global economic crisis in 2008, the various policies and measures of major capitalist countries mired in crisis—such as Trump's tax cuts, fiscal austerity, cuts to public welfare, and trade wars—indicate that the reformist path of the Roosevelt New Deal has lost the conditions for its existence. This is because the power of international finance monopoly capital enables it to block reformist policies that would limit its expansion, and even those ostensibly reformist measures serve the long-term goals of extreme conservative forces. This can be seen in the neoliberal crisis management measures implemented in many European and American countries in recent years, which have further exacerbated polarization, and also in the practical fate of the Neo-Keynesian school represented by Stiglitz, which was highly popular at the onset of the crisis but has since become largely ineffective. Regarding the second scenario, the current world socialist movement remains in a low ebb, and the path to revival is extremely arduous. Fortunately, a few socialist countries, including China, have broken through the encirclement of the capitalist world system, persevering amidst hardship, and to a certain extent, have counterbalanced the ravages of oligarchic capital. However, if during the great crisis, extreme fascist forces further expand while the growth of world socialist revolutionary forces remains limited, capitalism is most likely to fall into the third, backward-looking scenario: namely, inciting racism and ethnic conflicts, using hatred and fear to control the lower classes, and destroying the socialist movement through fascism.

从世界范围来看，自2008年全球经济危机爆发以来，深陷危机的主要资本主义国家的各项政策措施，如特朗普减税、财政紧缩、削减民众福利、打贸易战等表明，罗斯福新政式的改良主义道路已经失去了存在条件，因为国际金融垄断资本的强大使其有能力阻止限制其膨胀的改良主义政策，而且那些即使表面上的改良主义也是服务于极端保守势力长远目标的。这从近些年欧美多国实施进一步加剧两极分化的各项新自由主义危机治理措施中可以得到反映，也能从以斯蒂格里茨为代表的新凯恩斯主义学派从危机爆发之初红极一时到后来无甚大用的现实际遇中反映。对于第二种情况而言，当前世界社会主义运动仍处于低潮期，复兴之路极为艰巨，所幸中国等少数几个社会主义国家突破资本主义世界体系重围，在困顿中坚守，一定程度上制衡了寡头资本力量的肆虐。但是，如果大危机中法西斯极端势力进一步膨胀，而世界社会主义革命力量增长有限，资本主义最有可能掉入的就是向后看的第三种情况，即煽动种族主义和民族矛盾，制造仇恨与恐惧情绪控制底层民众，摧毁社会主义运动的法西斯主义。

Historical facts prove that the reason no new world war occurred after World War II is that the existence of socialist countries like China and the national-democratic liberation movements of the vast Third World played a key balancing role. At the same time, it was precisely due to the existence of the socialist camp and progressive forces that the United States and other Western capitalist countries implemented reformist social welfare systems internally that benefited the middle and lower classes. In the past two to three decades, the welfare protections for the lower social strata within Europe and the United States have become the primary target of attack and reduction by capital and political elites. This is also closely related to the world socialist movement's low ebb and the decline of the left. It is precisely because the external pressure of a united world socialism has been lifted, and the major capitalist countries' concerns about internal uprisings and revolutions have diminished, that they have become more unscrupulous in squeezing the lifeblood of their domestic lower classes.

历史事实证明，第二次世界大战之后之所以没有发生新的世界性战争，是因为中国等社会主义国家的存在和广大第三世界国家民族民主解放运动起了关键性制衡作用。同时，正是由于社会主义阵营及进步力量的存在，美国等西方资本主义国家在内部实行有利于中下层民众的改良主义社会福利制度。而近二三十年欧美国家内部社会底层的福利保障成为资本和政治精英首要攻击和消减的对象，也与世界社会主义运动陷入低潮及左翼的衰落密切相关，正是摆脱了世界社会主义联合的外在压力，各主要资本主义国家对内部发生起义和革命的忧虑减弱，才更无所顾忌地加大对国内底层民众敲骨吸髓。

The contemporary capitalist world system is being continuously dragged into the abyss of fascism by the crisis. Many Western scholars have written articles warning against the forces of neo-fascism, including Samir Amin, Slavoj Žižek, Alain Badiou, and William I. Robinson. Amin argues that the contemporary version of capitalism, neoliberal globalization, is the direct cause of the current world's potential slide into fascism. The polarization and economic crisis caused by neoliberalism have made the system unsustainable and generated widespread resistance. "It then turns its gaze to fascism, using fascism to respond to its increasingly evident defects. This is why fascism is reappearing in the West." William I. Robinson also points out that whether in its typical 20th-century form or possible 21st-century neo-fascist variants, it is a specific response to the crisis of capitalism. Capitalism currently faces a deep-seated crisis, involving both the economic dimension of a crisis of overaccumulation and the political dimension of a crisis of legitimacy or hegemony. The increasing influence of neo-fascist forces represented by Trumpism in the United States, Brexit in the United Kingdom, and the National Rally in France all represent the far-right conservative reaction to the global capitalist crisis.

当今资本主义世界体系正在被危机不断地拖入法西斯主义的深渊。多位西方学者撰文呼吁警惕新法西斯主义势力，如萨米尔·阿明、齐泽克、巴迪欧及威廉·罗宾逊等。阿明认为，资本主义当代版本的新自由主义全球化是当前世界可能陷入法西斯主义的直接原因。新自由主义造成的两极分化和经济危机使得这个体系不可持续，制造了大量的抵抗，“它就把目光投向了法西斯主义，用法西斯主义来回应它日益显著的缺陷。这就是为什么法西斯会在西方重新出现”。威廉·罗宾逊也指出，无论是20世纪的典型形式还是21世纪新法西斯的可能变种，都是对资本主义危机的一种特殊回应。当前资本主义面临深层次危机，既涉及积累过剩型危机的经济层面，又涉及合法性或霸权危机的政治层面。美国特朗普主义、英国脱欧及法国国民阵线为代表的新法西斯主义力量不断增加的影响，都代表着极右派保守主义对全球资本主义危机的反应。

The economic crisis occurring in the heartlands of capitalism in the 21st century has once again proven the inevitability of capitalism's inherent contradictions and the historical transience of capitalism. Faced with severe economic crisis and social turmoil, on the one hand, there are anti-capitalist movements rising one after another around the world, constantly proclaiming that "another world is possible," that the communist "specter" is reviving, and that the world socialist movement is revitalizing. On the other hand, extreme capitalist forces are also continuously breeding, and neo-fascism may once again drag humanity into the dark times of racism, chauvinism, and even world war. The capitalist economic crisis has placed humanity at another crossroads of historical development. Faced with this situation, capital, as an active and aggressive force, has long since united. "In the historical period just passed, an important phenomenon in world politics was the formation of elite power groups within various countries and their unification into an international transnational capitalist class. They are a special stratum of the bourgeoisie, believing in globalism and cosmopolitanism, with weak national and state concepts, basing their interests on globalization, and often treating their own countries as objects of consumption." However, popular movements are in a passive, dispersed, "in-itself" state, having lost their "class consciousness." The marginalization of left-wing socialist forces in political status and their ideological weakness mean that current popular movements are either scattered and powerless or are organized by right-wing ideologies. All of this is labeled as "populism" and is fiercely suppressed by capital groups. If left-wing action cannot stop the militaristic steps of Trump in the United States and the rise of fascist forces like the National Rally in France, it will mean another great disaster for the development of humanity.

21世纪发生于资本主义心脏国家的经济危机再次证明了资本主义固有矛盾的必然性和资本主义历史的暂时性，面对严重的经济危机和社会动荡，一方面是世界各地此起彼伏的反资本主义运动，它们在不断宣告“另一个世界是可能的”，共产主义“幽灵”正在复活，世界社会主义运动正在振兴；另一方面，资本主义极端势力也在不断滋生，新法西斯主义可能将人类再次拖入种族主义、沙文主义乃至世界战争的黑暗时刻。资本主义经济危机使当前人类处于历史发展的又一个十字路口，面对这种情况，资本作为一种主动的、进攻的力量，早就联合在一起了。“在刚刚过去的那个历史时期，世界政治的一个重要现象就是权贵精英集团在各国形成并联合起来形成国际性的跨国资产阶级。他们是资产阶级中的一个特殊阶层，信奉全球主义和世界主义，国家和民族观念淡漠，以全球化为利益基础，往往将自己的国家作为消费对象。”而民众运动却处于被动、分散，失去“阶级意识”的“自在”状态。左翼社会主义力量在政治地位上的边缘化和思想上的无力，使当前民众运动要么分散无力，要么被右翼思想组织起来，而这一切都被称为民粹主义，遭到资本集团极力打压。如果左翼行动无法阻止美国特朗普等军国主义步伐及法国国民阵线等法西斯势力的上升，那么对人类的发展意味着又一次巨大的灾难。

Therefore, from the perspective of the balance of power between the world capitalist system and the forces of global socialist movement revival, the possibility of the world currently sliding into the abyss of fascism is not small. Faced with the world capitalist crisis and the danger of humanity being dragged into the peril of fascism, the only fundamental way out is to revive the socialist movement and strengthen progressive forces like communism.

因此，从世界资本主义体系和全球社会主义运动复兴力量对比的角度看，当前全球滑向法西斯主义深渊的可能性不小。面对资本主义世界性危机，面对人类被拖入法西斯主义险境的可能性，只有复兴社会主义运动，壮大共产主义等进步力量才是根本出路。

(The author is an associate professor at the School of Marxism, Hexi University)

（作者系河西学院马克思主义学院副教授）

Online editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心